Human trafficking is still not “serious” in California

(7/14 — see update at end of post)

Two months ago, I reported that a bill to make human trafficking a “serious felony” in California, and thus apply the state’s recidivism laws to people who commit it, was watered down in the Senate Public Safety Committee to apply only to trafficking of minors. A majority of that committee apparently believes that actual slavery of adults in the 21st century is not serious enough to apply the same laws that apply to robbery and home burglary.

Well, that wasn’t watered down enough for the Democrats on the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Katy Grimes reports in the California Globe. Continue reading . . .

Manson Family Murderer Released From Prison

Leslie Van Houten, one of the Manson family cult members convicted of murdering a Los Angeles couple in 1969, was released from prison yesterday.  The LA Times reports that, like previous governors, Gavin Newsom had rejected the state parole board’s recommendation that Van Houten be released, but earlier this year a divided State Court of Appeal overruled the Governor, who chose not to appeal that ruling to the state Supreme Court.   The day after cult leader Charles Manson ordered the brutal murders of actress Sharon Tate and four others in her Benedict Canyon home, Manson accompanied Van Houten and five other cult members to the home of Los Feliz couple Leno and Rosemary La Bianca.  After Manson had tied the couple up and put pillowcases over their heads, cult member Tex Watson stabbed Lino to death.  Watson then ordered Van Houten and Patricia Krenwinkel to hold down Rosemary.  Watson stabbed her several times, then gave the knife to Van Houten, who stabbed the woman at least fourteen times.  The women then wrote “death to pigs” on the wall and “healter skelter” on the refrigerator door with Leno’s blood.

Continue reading . . .

Ninth Circuit: Ruling Blocking Removal of Homeless Camps Allowed to Stand

On July 5th, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals refused a request for en-banc review of Johnson v. City of Grants Pass,  a ruling which voided local ordinances allowing the city  to clear out homeless camps on public property.   In the Johnson ruling announced last September, a divided panel of the court expanded an earlier Ninth Circuit ruling (Martin v. City of Boise) which discovered that the homeless have a constitutional right to camp in parks and on sidewalks.   As reported in the Anchorage Daily News, the full court’s refusal to reconsider that holding was met with an unusually harsh dissent by 16 Ninth Circuit judges.  Among the dissenters Senior Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlian noted that no other federal court of appeals has discovered a constitutional right to sleep or camp on sidewalks and other public property.  The Eighth Amendment is “not a boundless remedy for all social and policy ills, including homelessness. It does not empower us to displace state and local decisionmakers with our own enlightened view of how to address a public crisis over which we can claim neither expertise nor authority, and it certainly does not authorize us to dictate municipal policy here,” he wrote.  The City of Grants Pass plans to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its appeal of the Johnson ruling.

Regression 101 and Discrimination

Do the usual explanations of statistics, and especially regression analysis, make your eyes glaze over? If so, join the very large club. Help is here from the Manhattan Institute. George Borjas has this article in the City Journal giving a nontechnical description of the use of regression in claims of discrimination, its difficulties, and why different experts can find different results from the same raw data.

The article discusses claims that Harvard discriminated against Asian applicants, the subject of a recent Supreme Court decision. The same principles apply to discrimination claims in criminal cases, including McCleskey v. Kemp (1987) and states with misguided and misnamed Racial Justice Acts. Continue reading . . .

BLM Activist Kills Five in Philly

A cross-dressing Black Lives Matter activist has been arrested for a mass shooting in a working class Philadelphia neighborhood Monday night.  Emily Crane and Andy Tillett of the New York Post report that Kimbrady Carriker surrendered after shooting at pursuing officers who had responded to shots-fired call in the city’s Kingsessing neighborhood.  Carriker had a rifle, pistol, police scanner and was wearing a bulletproof vest when taken into custody. According to police Carriker shot and killed four men in the street, after killing a fifth man in a house. He also shot and injured two children.  Carriker has no known connection to any of the victims.  During the George Floyd riots Carrkier posted a video of a burning a police car sprayed with “ACAB” which is shorthand for “All Coppers are Bast—ds.”  He had priors for illegal possession of a firearm and drug offenses and was sentenced to probation.  Continue reading . . .

Cal. DA Takes a Dive in Bogus Discrimination Case

Did Contra Costa County* District Attorney Diana Becton “take a dive” when her office was accused of discriminatory charging practices? Ron Matthias, retired Senior Asst. AG, has this op-ed in the San Jose Mercury News.

Thanks to the Contra Costa district attorney’s puzzling refusal to adequately defend her office against bogus allegations of racially discriminatory charging practices, the county’s most dangerous gang-banging murderers will avoid the punishment they deserve.

Diana Becton’s anemic response to both the charge of bias and a subsequent court ruling sustaining it will leave informed observers with the nagging suspicion that she’s happy with the result. She could use the ruling as a convenient excuse for never again seeking appropriate charges against hardcore gang members and for dropping charges against some who already have been convicted.

Under California law, a gang-inspired murderer can see his sentence “enhanced” by 10 additional years, and in the case of an especially egregious murder, the gang connection could support a “special circumstance” subjecting him to a no-parole life sentence or even the death penalty. In either instance, the connection must be charged and proved.

Continue reading . . .

Accountability for Crime in California?

The Right Message, Wrong Messenger Award for today goes to the owner of several San Francisco retail businesses, who said this:

My biggest gripe right now in San Francisco has been, frankly, we’re not enforcing existing laws … we’re not prosecuting the law breakers. Judges, DAs, the whole panoply — I want to see people held accountable for breaking the law.

Notice that the California Governor is missing from the list. So why is this person the wrong messenger? Continue reading . . .

Supreme Court’s ruling on online harassment outrages victims, advocates

On Tuesday, I noted the danger that the Supreme Court’s opinion in Counterman v. Colorado might be interpreted to require that speech must be classifiable as  a “true threat” in all stalking cases before a prosecution can go forward. Taylor Lorenz has this article in the WaPo with the above title reporting that the effects are being felt already. See below.

I can understand how the Court went forward with the threats analysis in light of the fact that that was how the decision being reviewed justified the prosecution, and that was how both parties presented it. The Court does not normally rule on issues raised only by amici curiae, although it does occasionally.

But there is no excuse for not stating explicitly that the Court was not holding or implying that all stalking cases based solely on communications must pass muster as “true threats” rather than the “time, place, or manner” doctrine. That question should have been expressly left for another day. Continue reading . . .

SCOTUS Bans Discrimination

This is off-topic for those who consider racial discrimination in college admissions a good thing, but for me and many others it qualifies as a crime resulting in real victims.    In one of the most thoughtful and concise opinions I have  ever read,  Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurrence in Students For Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, demolishes the outright racism promoted by today’s progressives, the roots of which reach back to Jim Crow.   It should be required reading for every high school American history student and every college Constitutional Law class.

The Pillowcase Rapist and the Folly of Current Cal. Policies

A post earlier today described the case of the “pillowcase rapist” and his arrest for a new violent crime at the age of 71, following release after only half his sentence. Further research has determined that this appalling result comes from an old, misguided law that has since been fixed, not the current misguided policy. Even so, the case illustrates the folly of the current policies. It is yet one more example of the maxim that those who cannot remember history are condemned to repeat it. Continue reading . . .